Could a smaller church be better?

Hmm · Apr 16, 2021

bling said:
There are wonderful enjoyable service oganizations that are great social oganizations and some have "Church" at the end of their name. What is needed is to have the individuals allowing Jesus to live in them and through them serving others, which includes physically helping others, but also teaching, mentoring, exalting, incuoraging, challenging, loving, listening, disciplining, warning, befriending and spending time with others.

I agree. While an element of practical to the local community is essential imo the church had to be careful not to become just a branch of the social services.

Hmm · Apr 16, 2021

Philip_B said:
I am find this conversation a bit chilly at the moment, mainly because I am part of a small congregation that is to be merged into a larger congregation against our unanimous wishes.

Theologically the Parish Church can be described as ‘the local expression of the body of Christ’. There is some fundamental truth in that, and small Parish Communities should be reminded of it. We are complete. We are enough. Sure we can grow, yet the presence of Christ is whole and entire here in this community, as much as it is in a massed gathering with cameras, you beut YouTube production teams, massed choirs, and whatever else it is that floats the boat at the time.

Perhaps Pope Francis put this more eloquently when he wrote

‘Joined to the incarnate Son, present in the Eucharist, the whole cosmos gives thanks to God. Indeed the Eucharist is itself an act of cosmic love:

“Yes, cosmic! Because even when it is celebrated on the humble altar of a country church, the Eucharist is always in some way celebrated on the altar of the world”. The Eucharist joins heaven and earth; it embraces and penetrates all creation. The world which came forth from God’s hands returns to him in blessed and undivided adoration: in the bread of the Eucharist, “creation is projected towards divinization, towards the holy wedding feast, towards unification with the Creator himself”.’ (Laudato Si at 236).

One of the challenges we face in an ever changing world is how do we go about maintaining the Parish Community, both in terms of numbers of people attending, and the financial capacity to pay our way as a community of faith in the world. Many of the costs associated with running a Parish Community has risen at rates far greater than inflation, whilst our resonance in the reach into our communities has sometimes, ok often, diminished.

What matters is not the size of the congregation, but the growth opportunities it provides for its members. One of the things that helps people stay in small congregations, is that in the small congregation we matter, where as many of the multiplex-mega congregations have big back doors, and many people are not noticed. The incarnation tells us the each one of us matters, and that may well be one of the strengths of smaller congregations. Small congregations however must remain open and welcoming to new members, because we all matter.

Growth for Christians is not only numbers. A parish should not be judged as successful simply on the basis of collections or body counts, but rather on its capacity to nurture a flourishing Christian life in its members.

That's a big change for you and everyone in the small church and I hope it goes well. Hopefully you'll find that there are even more opportunities to help people grow once you've merged with the bigger church.

Toro · Apr 16, 2021

Id say its far more likely a small church is better than a large one.

Jesus Himself had a small group.

When the number of His followers became huge.... He spoke of eating His flesh and drinking His blood... sending most of them away.... most people do not want to hear what the Lord says, they simply desire the material blessings.

Overall, size shouldn't be a concern but the gospel they preach... is it one for those with itching ears..... or is it the true gospel of Christ?

Far more likely to find the itching ears kind in a megachurch IMO.

public hermit · Apr 16, 2021

chevyontheriver said:
Sometimes, in population ecology, a long decline is just the prelude to extinction. The only promise we have is the promise of Jesus not to leave us orphans.

I'm sure you're probably right. I don't know a thing about population ecology. It seems intuitively reasonable, all things being equal, that the more it becomes disadvantageous to be Christian, the higher the quality would become. Obviously, significant bodily persecution would prove the point, I would think. Whoever was just playing at religion would be gone by then.

The other extreme is a society saturated with Christianity. Now the disadvantage would be for the non-Christian. And there's lots of room inbetween those extremes. But as you say, a lot of variables are not accounted for in that intuition.

chevyontheriver · Apr 16, 2021

public hermit said:
I'm sure you're probably right. I don't know a thing about population ecology. It seems intuitively reasonable, all things being equal, that the more it becomes disadvantageous to be Christian, the higher the quality would become. Obviously, significant bodily persecution would prove the point, I would think. Whoever was just playing at religion would be gone by then.

The other extreme is a society saturated with Christianity. Now the disadvantage would be for the non-Christian. And there's lots of room inbetween those extremes. But as you say, a lot of variables are not accounted for in that intuition.

All things being equal, I agree, the more disadvantageous it is to be Christian the higher the quality (whatever we mean by quality) of the remaining Christians.

Paleontology shows that most species that ever were are already extinct. We humans have only one institution even approaching 2000 years in existence. Point being that extinction is normal and almost to be expected. We have only one advantage, which is the Lord, who promised we would never become orphans.

Strong in Him · Apr 17, 2021

Hmm said:
I've been watching an ’80s British political satire sit-com called 'Yes, Prime Minister'. It's pretty cynical and it had this to say about church "Modernists" in one of the episodes, 'The Bishop's Gambit'. In this episode, the Prime Minister, Jim Hacker, has to recommend the appointment of a bishop to the Queen but he's not keen on either of the two offered by the Church of England. He has heard on the grapevine that one of the candidates is a Modernist and has the following conversation (slightly edited) with his Cabinet Secretary Sir Humphrey Appleby:

James Hacker : Humphrey, what's a Modernist in the Church of England?

Sir Humphrey Appleby : Ah, well, the word "Modernist" is code for non-believer.

JH : You mean an atheist?

HA : No, Prime Minister. An atheist clergyman couldn't continue to draw his stipend. So, when they stop believing in God, they call themselves "Modernists".

JH : How could the Church of England suggest an atheist as Bishop of Bury St Edmunds?

HA : Well, very easily. The Church of England is primarily a social organization, not a religious one.

JH : Is it?

HA : Oh yes. It's part of the rich social fabric of this country. So bishops need to be the sorts of chaps who speak properly and know which knife and fork to use. The sort of people one can look up to.

...

HA : The Queen is inseparable from the Church of England.

JH : And what about God?

AH : I think he is what is called an optional extra.

...

JH : So, the ideal candidate [for a bishopric] from the Church of England's point of view would be a cross between a socialite, and a socialist.

HA : Precisely.

One of my favourite episodes; brilliant.

Hmm said:
I think that's pretty funny but is it true, or still true? My main thought on the matter is that this is an '80s comedy and so may not necessarily reflect the times of today. The Church of England, certainly, has shrunk quite a lot since then so there's not as much social kudos to be gained from being associated with it which begs the question whether church goers now are more likely to actually believe in God than may have been the case in the past.

There was a time where everybody went to church; it was expected and there was nothing more to do on a Sunday. As such, it made perfect sense to build buildings "to the glory of God".
The thing is that the world has changed now; there are dozens of activities possible, and available, on a Sunday - yet still, believers of all denominations are sitting in their buildings wondering why no one wants to come in and join them, and saying "where did they all go?"
It's not surprising that numbers - in maybe all denominations - are falling.

Hmm said:
So my question then is: Is the fact that the church in the Western world is declining in numbers necessary a bad thing or could it be heralding the return of a more devout church?

The church is the people.
Whether or not numbers of Christians is declining, I don't know; I haven't looked into it. I don't think that numbers in a church building on a Sunday morning is the only, or best, way of counting how many people are active Christians, in a relationship with the Father and living out their faith - going "to church" does not mean that a person is a Christian. Some very strong Christians may not go, or be able to go, to church.

I haven't been to church for over a year - because of the pandemic. Even when our church re-opened for a short time, I didn't feel hat all the restrictions - 6 feet apart, no singing, touching etc etc - were conducive to either worship nor fellowship.
I find it sad that people are rushing to get back into the buildings, "back to normal" without asking what God is saying in all of this. He didn't send the pandemic, but he could well be saying "now that you ARE out of your buildings ......".

I'm hoping that this time will have lead people to stop and think "what IS important?" and hopefully conclude that it's not buildings, committees, property management, finance and fundraising to get the money to redecorate the church hall.
Maybe declining numbers, or the closure of buildings, is the only way in which the Lord will get our attention.

Anthony2019 · Apr 17, 2021

I think that any decline in the number of practising Christians is worrying.

I'd like to see an increase in the number of Christians but I don't always agree with the way the church goes about evangelism and witness.

When it comes to attending church, I much prefer smaller congregations to larger ones. Not to the point of becoming virtually empty, but also not too big that you feel totally lost in a crowd.

These days, everything has to be "big". Our cars and homes, our sofas and refrigerators. Everything has to be large, loud and brash to grab both our attention and those around us. If we don't buy into it then we are told we are missing out! Imagine walking into your local takeaway restaurant and reading advertisements inviting you to "downsize your meal". It isn't going to work. We live in a materialist and consumerist society where our brains have already been hard wired and trained into believing that bigger is always better.

As Christians we are doing the same with our churches. These days we don't just have "pastors", we have "mega pastors". We don't just have "churches" we have "mega churches". Filling the church pews has become big business. There's more money in the offering plate. There's more people to buy the worship group's latest CD or the pastor's latest book.

We are told in the scriptures we cannot serve both God and money, but we live our lives as if we can.

Instead of running our churches like a top FTSE company, perhaps we should study the lives of the early Apostles, who lived and ministered to each together simply, humbly and intimately, and gave everything they had to those in need.

Hmm · Apr 17, 2021

Strong in Him said:
I find it sad that people are rushing to get back into the buildings, "back to normal" without asking what God is saying in all of this. He didn't send the pandemic, but he could well be saying "now that you ARE out of your buildings ......".

That's an interesting thought. I agree, it does seem to be a big waste of the experience we've all gained over the past year if we just resumed as before.

I imagine that a lot of people are put off by a church building even the really quaint ones. I know one guy who thinks he's done be too many bad things to go through the doors! I have tried to tell him that that he's just the sort of person the church is for and that we're all like him anyway but to no avail alas.

I used to live in Chester until last year and the churches there had a couple of schemes that were proving quite popular among the general public. One was called Night Church and this was a church in the heart of town being open every Friday and Saturday night from 10pm till 3am. They offer free tea and coffee and a listening ear to anyone, usually those leaving the pubs or nightclubs. I knew a couple of people involved and one told me that a guy had wandered in from a club and told his story of his divorce and how this had affected him. He spoke for quite a long time and at the end he told her that she was the first person he had ever told his story too. There are an awful lot of very lonely people out there. And this particular guy was successful in many ways. He had a good job and lots of friends but still no-one to whom he could confide in about personal things like that.

And just quickly, the other thing they did, and this has now spread to many towns in the UK, is Street Pastoring which you may be aware of anyway. This has two people, preferably a man and a woman, walking around a designated part of town, again when the pubs and clubs are closing, wearing a jacket that says 'Street Pastor'. I know a few and they tell me that lots of people could me up to them intrigued as to what they are doing and especially interested when told that they are doing it for free. What they do is again offer a listening ear and they help people get home if they are very drunk. They also carry flip-flops round because a lot of women take their heels off after wearing them all night and walk around barefoot when there's quite a lot of glass around - this in particular has proven popular. The Street Pastors are part of the scene now and the police work with them at times because they provide a low confrontational way of dealing with minor incidents. Apparently there's never been an incident where a Street Pastor has been assaulted. Anyway, sorry to ramble on but I think programmes like this can only do the church good. It's offering really useful and compassionate services, people are impressed that they're doing it for free as volunteers and faith is not forced on people - it's only spoken about if the person brings it up themselves which is often the case.

public hermit · Apr 17, 2021

Hmm said:
That's an interesting thought. I agree, it does seem to be a big waste of the experience we've all gained over the past year if we just resumed as before.

I imagine that a lot of people are put off by a church building even the really quaint ones. I know one guy who thinks he's done be too many bad things to go through the doors! I have tried to tell him that that he's just the sort of person the church is for and that we're all like him anyway but to no avail alas.

I used to live in Chester until last year and the churches there had a couple of schemes that were proving quite popular among the general public. One was called Night Church and this was a church in the heart of town being open every Friday and Saturday night from 10pm till 3am. They offer free tea and coffee and a listening ear to anyone, usually those leaving the pubs or nightclubs. I knew a couple of people involved and one told me that a guy had wandered in from a club and told his story of his divorce and how this had affected him. He spoke for quite a long time and at the end he told her that she was the first person he had ever told his story too. There are an awful lot of very lonely people out there. And this particular guy was successful in many ways. He had a good job and lots of friends but still no-one to whom he could confide in about personal things like that.

And just quickly, the other thing they did, and this has now spread to many towns in the UK, is Street Pastoring which you may be aware of anyway. This has two people, preferably a man and a woman, walking around a designated part of town, again when the pubs and clubs are closing, wearing a jacket that says 'Street Pastor'. I know a few and they tell me that lots of people could me up to them intrigued as to what they are doing and especially interested when told that they are doing it for free. What they do is again offer a listening ear and they help people get home if they are very drunk. They also carry flip-flops round because a lot of women take their heels off after wearing them all night and walk around barefoot when there's quite a lot of glass around - this in particular has proven popular. The Street Pastors are part of the scene now and the police work with them at times because they provide a low confrontational way of dealing with minor incidents. Apparently there's never been an incident where a Street Pastor has been assaulted. Anyway, sorry to ramble on but I think programmes like this can only do the church good. It's offering really useful and compassionate services, people are impressed that they're doing it for free as volunteers and faith is not forced on people - it's only spoken about if the person brings it up themselves which is often the case.

Man, I love all this. See, there are ways. I was also hoping the separation from buildings would highlight the true nature of the body of Christ. I'm not sure how much of that happened, here. But, yeah, these kinds of ministries are great.

Pioneer3mm · Apr 17, 2021

Strong in Him said:
One of my favourite episodes; brilliant.

There was a time where everybody went to church; it was expected and there was nothing more to do on a Sunday. As such, it made perfect sense to build buildings "to the glory of God".
The thing is that the world has changed now; there are dozens of activities possible, and available, on a Sunday - yet still, believers of all denominations are sitting in their buildings wondering why no one wants to come in and join them, and saying "where did they all go?"
It's not surprising that numbers - in maybe all denominations - are falling.

The church is the people.
Whether or not numbers of Christians is declining, I don't know; I haven't looked into it. I don't think that numbers in a church building on a Sunday morning is the only, or best, way of counting how many people are active Christians, in a relationship with the Father and living out their faith - going "to church" does not mean that a person is a Christian. Some very strong Christians may not go, or be able to go, to church.

I haven't been to church for over a year - because of the pandemic. Even when our church re-opened for a short time, I didn't feel hat all the restrictions - 6 feet apart, no singing, touching etc etc - were conducive to either worship nor fellowship.
I find it sad that people are rushing to get back into the buildings, "back to normal" without asking what God is saying in all of this. He didn't send the pandemic, but he could well be saying "now that you ARE out of your buildings ......".

I'm hoping that this time will have lead people to stop and think "what IS important?" and hopefully conclude that it's not buildings, committees, property management, finance and fundraising to get the money to redecorate the church hall.
Maybe declining numbers, or the closure of buildings, is the only way in which the Lord will get our attention.

Good post.
---
".. hoping that this time will lead people to stop and think 'what is important?'.."
- I agree.
---
Maybe it is time to search/reflect on..the meaning of the
'Church' again.
- Beyond..nicely packaged services/programs.

Hmm · Apr 17, 2021

public hermit said:
Man, I love all this. See, there are ways. I was also hoping the separation from buildings would highlight the true nature of the body of Christ. I'm not sure how much of that happened, here. But, yeah, these kinds of ministries are great.

Yes, there does seem to be a resistance to the very idea of Christianity but there is clearly a real need in proplt for something other than a material existence. Nearly all my friends are secular and if ever the subject of Christianity comes up - I never initiate it but it occasionally came up over the last pint or two in a pub back in the day when we could do such things. A friend would start to talk about God usually in a dismissive way, knowing I'm a Christian, which I always took to be a kind of ironic invitation, but when I tried to explain Christianity often the person would kind of freeze and not even consider my argument. It shows me that people do have a God-shaped hole in them but also that there's something about Christianity that rubs them up the wrong way - perhaps that's mainly the negative effect of the Fundamentalist movement that was discussed in your recent thread. It also says to me though that discussions and arguments only go so far, and not very far, and what really impresses people is personal conduct and how you live your life and show love towards people. Quite a challenge!

lsume · Apr 17, 2021

Hmm said:
I've been watching an ’80s British political satire sit-com called 'Yes, Prime Minister'. It's pretty cynical and it had this to say about church "Modernists" in one of the episodes, 'The Bishop's Gambit'. In this episode, the Prime Minister, Jim Hacker, has to recommend the appointment of a bishop to the Queen but he's not keen on either of the two offered by the Church of England. He has heard on the grapevine that one of the candidates is a Modernist and has the following conversation (slightly edited) with his Cabinet Secretary Sir Humphrey Appleby:

James Hacker : Humphrey, what's a Modernist in the Church of England?

Sir Humphrey Appleby : Ah, well, the word "Modernist" is code for non-believer.

JH : You mean an atheist?

HA : No, Prime Minister. An atheist clergyman couldn't continue to draw his stipend. So, when they stop believing in God, they call themselves "Modernists".

JH : How could the Church of England suggest an atheist as Bishop of Bury St Edmunds?

HA : Well, very easily. The Church of England is primarily a social organization, not a religious one.

JH : Is it?

HA : Oh yes. It's part of the rich social fabric of this country. So bishops need to be the sorts of chaps who speak properly and know which knife and fork to use. The sort of people one can look up to.

...

HA : The Queen is inseparable from the Church of England.

JH : And what about God?

AH : I think he is what is called an optional extra.

...

JH : So, the ideal candidate [for a bishopric] from the Church of England's point of view would be a cross between a socialite, and a socialist.

HA : Precisely.

I think that's pretty funny but is it true, or still true? My main thought on the matter is that this is an '80s comedy and so may not necessarily reflect the times of today. The Church of England, certainly, has shrunk quite a lot since then so there's not as much social kudos to be gained from being associated with it which begs the question whether church goers now are more likely to actually believe in God than may have been the case in the past.

So my question then is: Is the fact that the church in the Western world is declining in numbers necessary a bad thing or could it be heralding the return of a more devout church?

Something that you might be interested in reading about is the persecution that was extended by the Church of England. As I understand it, many people left England because of religious persecution.

Hmm · Apr 17, 2021

lsume said:
Something that you might be interested in reading about is the persecution that was extended by the Church of England. As I understand it, many people left England because of religious persecution.

That's true but it's certainly not the case now. The C of E is more like a benign and slightly apologetic woolly baa-lamb now than anything like that!

fhansen · Apr 17, 2021

Hmm said:
I've been watching an ’80s British political satire sit-com called 'Yes, Prime Minister'. It's pretty cynical and it had this to say about church "Modernists" in one of the episodes, 'The Bishop's Gambit'. In this episode, the Prime Minister, Jim Hacker, has to recommend the appointment of a bishop to the Queen but he's not keen on either of the two offered by the Church of England. He has heard on the grapevine that one of the candidates is a Modernist and has the following conversation (slightly edited) with his Cabinet Secretary Sir Humphrey Appleby:

James Hacker : Humphrey, what's a Modernist in the Church of England?

Sir Humphrey Appleby : Ah, well, the word "Modernist" is code for non-believer.

JH : You mean an atheist?

HA : No, Prime Minister. An atheist clergyman couldn't continue to draw his stipend. So, when they stop believing in God, they call themselves "Modernists".

JH : How could the Church of England suggest an atheist as Bishop of Bury St Edmunds?

HA : Well, very easily. The Church of England is primarily a social organization, not a religious one.

JH : Is it?

HA : Oh yes. It's part of the rich social fabric of this country. So bishops need to be the sorts of chaps who speak properly and know which knife and fork to use. The sort of people one can look up to.

...

HA : The Queen is inseparable from the Church of England.

JH : And what about God?

AH : I think he is what is called an optional extra.

...

JH : So, the ideal candidate [for a bishopric] from the Church of England's point of view would be a cross between a socialite, and a socialist.

HA : Precisely.

I think that's pretty funny but is it true, or still true? My main thought on the matter is that this is an '80s comedy and so may not necessarily reflect the times of today. The Church of England, certainly, has shrunk quite a lot since then so there's not as much social kudos to be gained from being associated with it which begs the question whether church goers now are more likely to actually believe in God than may have been the case in the past.

So my question then is: Is the fact that the church in the Western world is declining in numbers necessary a bad thing or could it be heralding the return of a more devout church?

Yes, I think it means the modernists are going away, God’s less optional, the rest are getting more “real”.

Mountainmike · Apr 17, 2021

One of my favourite all time shows.
How far from the truth is it?
The authors once said, that the episodes that sounded most far fetched, were those most closely modelled on reality! It is a little known fact that Margaret Thatcher wrote one!

Whilst I hold many anglicans in high respect, I was one, it was the erosion of core doctrine in many parts of the church which was one of the drivers of moving away from it. Indeed the lack of any authoritative body to resolve issues of doctrine.

It is a world away from the time we live, it is worth considering history: there was a time when in the gentry, the first son would become the inheritor of title and wealth, the next would become a bishop to avoid conflict for inheritance....As Sir Humphrey points out they were "solid" "reliable" chaps" educated at the right universities "both of them - destined to sit in the house of Lords! One can argue whether that was the most fertile ground for a Christian!

Hmm said:
I've been watching an ’80s British political satire sit-com called 'Yes, Prime Minister'. It's pretty cynical and it had this to say about church "Modernists" in one of the episodes, 'The Bishop's Gambit'. In this episode, the Prime Minister, Jim Hacker, has to recommend the appointment of a bishop to the Queen but he's not keen on either of the two offered by the Church of England. He has heard on the grapevine that one of the candidates is a Modernist and has the following conversation (slightly edited) with his Cabinet Secretary Sir Humphrey Appleby:

James Hacker : Humphrey, what's a Modernist in the Church of England?

Sir Humphrey Appleby : Ah, well, the word "Modernist" is code for non-believer.

JH : You mean an atheist?

HA : No, Prime Minister. An atheist clergyman couldn't continue to draw his stipend. So, when they stop believing in God, they call themselves "Modernists".

JH : How could the Church of England suggest an atheist as Bishop of Bury St Edmunds?

HA : Well, very easily. The Church of England is primarily a social organization, not a religious one.

JH : Is it?

HA : Oh yes. It's part of the rich social fabric of this country. So bishops need to be the sorts of chaps who speak properly and know which knife and fork to use. The sort of people one can look up to.

...

HA : The Queen is inseparable from the Church of England.

JH : And what about God?

AH : I think he is what is called an optional extra.

...

JH : So, the ideal candidate [for a bishopric] from the Church of England's point of view would be a cross between a socialite, and a socialist.

HA : Precisely.

I think that's pretty funny but is it true, or still true? My main thought on the matter is that this is an '80s comedy and so may not necessarily reflect the times of today. The Church of England, certainly, has shrunk quite a lot since then so there's not as much social kudos to be gained from being associated with it which begs the question whether church goers now are more likely to actually believe in God than may have been the case in the past.

So my question then is: Is the fact that the church in the Western world is declining in numbers necessary a bad thing or could it be heralding the return of a more devout church?

Pavel Mosko · Apr 17, 2021

Hmm said:
So my question then is: Is the fact that the church in the Western world is declining in numbers necessary a bad thing or could it be heralding the return of a more devout church?

Your thread is interesting because I was wondering to myself this very thing with Covid. Most likely many churches are going to go belly up from lack of attendance and the fact they have high bills etc. So I was wondering if this might be a good thing for up and coming ministers. Back 20 years, I dabbled with some church planting with my best friend that didn't really come to anything except helping a few people and couples and families. But the church planting was done in an area that was demographically good as far an area that had a lot of people statistically speaking.

But one problem we reached in the US, is the fact that churches are to some degree local businesses. Indeed many times, they are run like a specific family owned business. Where the biggest consideration is that they continue to earn money for the entrepreneur that founded them.

Another little point is the lack of respect that you get if you are part of a little group. I mean you can have a staff pastor, who is making a comfortable salary but doesn't do anything but work at his little niche look down at you, when all he has on you is his comfortable salary and position. Basically you might know a lot more than he does on every level, the only thing he has is his position in a large organization etc.

But that last point is really important because often smaller groups can actually help people in a more profound way. When it comes to counseling and other personal ministry. They often get the trouble and time consuming people with all the problems, who often have little money to give etc. But that is a real issue because typically there is a kind of time budget that exists for ministry. And the larger churches tend to want to attract people who are looking for a show, are attracted to their music and side ministeries. And this is probably even truer of more "Modern" non-liturgical churches that have grown in popularity, like the one depicted in this humor video below. Because in leaving tradition, of liturgy and custom, the entertainment aspects get cranked up more.

PS - Oh I forgot the point I was going to make. Namely, God might be "shuffling the deck" so to speak. When a new forest fire comes through it gives opportunity for new growth with the smaller plants than normally get little sun. And that sort of thing might also be true here. OF course I also see this as simply accelerating the Great Apostasy that we see in Revelation and the end time prophecies of the Gospels.

Andrewn · Apr 17, 2021

On 1 October 1949, Mao Zedong proclaimed the People's Republic of China. So, what happened after 70 years of atheist propaganda against religion, calling it “spiritual anesthesia”? A look at the status of religion in modern-day China is probably relevant to this discussion and, I think, it shows how people are created for God and that religion is not going anywhere.

"Religious observance in China is on the rise. Amid China’s economic boom and rapid modernization, experts point to the emergence of a spiritual vacuum as a trigger for the growing number of religious believers, particularly adherents of Christianity and traditional Chinese religious groups."

"The government’s tally of registered religious believers is around two hundred million, or less than 10 percent of the population, according to several sources, including the UN Human Rights Council’s 2018 Universal Periodic Review. Yet some independent reports suggest the number of religious adherents in China is far larger and is steadily increasing. The research and advocacy group Freedom House estimated in 2017 that there are more than 350 million religious believers in China, primarily made up of Chinese Buddhists, followed by Protestants, Muslims, Falun Gong practitioners, Catholics, and Tibetan Buddhists. Many believers do not follow organized religion and are said to practice traditional folk religion. These practitioners, along with members of underground house churches and banned religious groups, account for many of the country’s unregistered believers."

Studies show that 52% of the population practice Buddhism, Taoism, and folk-religion. Christians represent approximately 7.4% of the population.

"The Pew Research Center estimated [PDF] that in 2010 there were sixty-seven million Christians in China, roughly 5 percent of the total population, and, of these, fifty-eight million were Protestant, including both state-sanctioned and independent churches. Others estimate this number to now be closer to one hundred million, with unregistered churchgoers outnumbering members of official churches nearly two to one. Meanwhile, the Beijing-based Chinese Academy of Social Sciences’ estimate is far smaller, tallying twenty-nine million Christian believers."

The State of Religion in China

Fantine · Apr 17, 2021

I have found a very strange conundrum in my local community among Christian churches.

The ones whose services are most "modern," with the big screens, light shows, praise bands, livestreamed services, etc. are often the most literally Biblical.

The ones who have the candles and incense--smells and bells--and pretty much follow some version of the Catholic Mass (mostly mainstream Protestant) are often the most progressive. They are all about social justice, welcoming the outcast. They are theologically open, curious, experimental.

In terms of young people and faith, I think that while the rock music and light shows attract them, they feel that the theology lacks depth. But while the mainstream churches have a lot of depth, their traditional services might not speak to their emotions.

As for me, I think you need emotion and depth. I think we are all on our own spiritual journeys and that church communities are a resource to help us get there.

I prefer communities of seekers who realize we may never have all the answers--but that's me.

lsume · Apr 17, 2021

Hmm said:
That's true but it's certainly not the case now. The C of E is more like a benign and slightly apologetic woolly baa-lamb now than anything like that!

Seems like neither way works but God is faithful and won’t lose any of His elect.

Sketcher · Apr 17, 2021

Hmm said:
I've been watching an ’80s British political satire sit-com called 'Yes, Prime Minister'. It's pretty cynical and it had this to say about church "Modernists" in one of the episodes, 'The Bishop's Gambit'. In this episode, the Prime Minister, Jim Hacker, has to recommend the appointment of a bishop to the Queen but he's not keen on either of the two offered by the Church of England. He has heard on the grapevine that one of the candidates is a Modernist and has the following conversation (slightly edited) with his Cabinet Secretary Sir Humphrey Appleby:

James Hacker : Humphrey, what's a Modernist in the Church of England?

Sir Humphrey Appleby : Ah, well, the word "Modernist" is code for non-believer.

JH : You mean an atheist?

HA : No, Prime Minister. An atheist clergyman couldn't continue to draw his stipend. So, when they stop believing in God, they call themselves "Modernists".

JH : How could the Church of England suggest an atheist as Bishop of Bury St Edmunds?

HA : Well, very easily. The Church of England is primarily a social organization, not a religious one.

JH : Is it?

HA : Oh yes. It's part of the rich social fabric of this country. So bishops need to be the sorts of chaps who speak properly and know which knife and fork to use. The sort of people one can look up to.

...

HA : The Queen is inseparable from the Church of England.

JH : And what about God?

AH : I think he is what is called an optional extra.

...

JH : So, the ideal candidate [for a bishopric] from the Church of England's point of view would be a cross between a socialite, and a socialist.

HA : Precisely.

I think that's pretty funny but is it true, or still true? My main thought on the matter is that this is an '80s comedy and so may not necessarily reflect the times of today. The Church of England, certainly, has shrunk quite a lot since then so there's not as much social kudos to be gained from being associated with it which begs the question whether church goers now are more likely to actually believe in God than may have been the case in the past.

So my question then is: Is the fact that the church in the Western world is declining in numbers necessary a bad thing or could it be heralding the return of a more devout church?

Well, one of the factors here (though not the only factor) is the C of E's traditional status as a state religion. In the US, we don't have that, and I think both that and the bootstraps mentality we have here permeates spiritual thinking and gets applied more often to spiritual life. I think this is part of why other Western nation's see us as a more religious society, even though we do have our problems too.

With that out of the way though, there are certain aspects of religious appearance that get socially normalized, and those aren't necessarily the foundations of strong personal faith - hence the speeches and the dinners you mentioned, and various things like church attendance and saying the right things. They do have their value, faithful church attendance is better for you than a lot of people will give it credit for, but an observation was made about the campus ministry I was involved in. At some schools, it's bigger than in others, and in the regions where many of those schools are, you have students attend because they are expected to attend, along with the students who are there because they are seeking or otherwise really want to be there. At other schools, you just have the students who really want to be there, and the seekers. How much that affects the quality of the group I cannot tell you, but I thought that was interesting.

Could a smaller church be better?

Hey, I'm just this guy, you know

Hey, I'm just this guy, you know

Oh, Hello!

social troglodyte

Well-Known Member

Great is thy faithfulness

Pax et bonum!

Hey, I'm just this guy, you know

social troglodyte

Well-Known Member

Hey, I'm just this guy, you know

Well-Known Member

Hey, I'm just this guy, you know

Oldbie

Well-Known Member

Arch-Dude of the Apostolic

Well-Known Member

Dona Quixote

Well-Known Member

Born Imperishable

Similar threads